Unbelievable Pomposity from the NYT

They Love To Hate Her

In a display of haughtiness extreme even for the elitists at the New York Times, Amerika's newspaper of record published today a sneeringly condescending attack on Sarah Palin entitled "Palin Joins Debate on Heated Speech With Words That Stir New Controversy."

Now, we at COTT are not huge admirers of Alaska's former governor, but we remember Palin's debate against Joe Biden ("Hi Joe"), at which it became clear that this woman is a lot more eloquent than Obama's bumbling number 2, and certainly not worthy of the boundless contempt which the vermin at the New York Times reserve for her. 

From their lofty perch of moral superiority and enlightenment, the Times says this of Palin: 

"Ms. Palin awakened a new controversy by invoking a phrase frought with religious symbolism about the false accusations used by anti-Semites of Jews murdering Christian children. It was unclear wether Ms. Palin was aware of the historical meaning of the phrase."

(Itals our emphasis). Now, although use of the term "blood libel" by Palin might have been a bit inappropriate, how disgusting of the New York Times to suggest that Palin had no idea what it meant.

Even if she didn't, it is still true that the same smear campaign that tried to link the Arizona shooter to Jared Taylor and the conservative right was used by the communists at the Times to blame the killings on Palin, too.

It gets worse:

"Twice, [Palin] called the United States "exceptional," a frequent dig at Mr. Obama, whom conservatives accuse of not believing in the concept of 'American Exceptionalism'."

If she had bowed to Stone-age Islamic dictators with dirty beards and apologized for making Haiti poor, maybe the Times would have given her a break. But to even suggest that the West might have something going for it, is to commit the most hateful of thought crimes to the crypto-delusional psychopaths at the New York Times.

Additionally, as if the Times needed more rope to hang themselves with, they again publish this misleading little factoid:

"In the midterm elections last year, Ms. Palin used a map with cross hairs over several swing Congressional districts, which Ms. Giffords highlighted in a television interview at the time as an example of overheated political speech." 

As we saw in the post below, the Democrats used an almost identical map in 2004. And their map actually used the words  "target" and "enemies."

The New York Times: keeping it hypocritical 24/7.